Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • It doesn’t matter. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentatio

    It doesn’t matter. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 07:58:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216630653418188800

    Reply addressees: @ovjocm @JayWamsted @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216253226325962752


    IN REPLY TO:

    @ovjocm

    @JayWamsted @charlesmurray …test right, you are observing a combination of the actual factors and can’t resolve them statistically. This is superificllay plausible IMO, but not my specialty so maybe MO should not count for much. Will retweet to Murray to see what the people there think.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216253226325962752

  • There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexu

    There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together. (We have a ‘portfolio’ of them.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 07:56:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216630066588913665

    Reply addressees: @ovjocm @JayWamsted @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216248357363974145


    IN REPLY TO:

    @ovjocm

    @JayWamsted @charlesmurray Ya, if there are three factors instead of one, that would be evidence against the hypothesis that there is one. People have been pondering why there is apparently one factor since 1904: https://t.co/rpn1DkcfmI I will have a closer look.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216248357363974145

  • BS Pseudoscience. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolat

    BS Pseudoscience. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 07:47:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216627927623897088

    Reply addressees: @JayWamsted @ovjocm @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1211307775269228544


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JayWamsted

    @ovjocm @charlesmurray Forgot the link

    https://t.co/PJGXZP9PVN

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1211307775269228544

  • What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurat

    What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 07:45:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216627198993620992

    Reply addressees: @JayWamsted

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1210975859001180160


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JayWamsted

    Exactly. IQ science = Race science.

    If you follow the link in Bret Stephens’s article you’ll find that the IQ claims are based mostly on science from the 60s & 70s.

    Which is about the last time IQ science had any credibility. https://t.co/4lCWRyJ03R

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1210975859001180160

  • COMBINING IQ AND PERSONALITY What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied,

    COMBINING IQ AND PERSONALITY

    What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences.

    We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection.

    There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together.

    We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating).

    Well that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive,Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context.

    The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial).

    Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 03:25:00 UTC

  • COMBINING IQ AND PERSONALITY What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied,

    COMBINING IQ AND PERSONALITY

    What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences.

    We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection.

    There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together.

    We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating).

    Well that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive,Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context.

    The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial).

    Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 03:20:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html

    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-13 02:49:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216552754564431872

    Reply addressees: @Alt_Illegal @EricLiford @AnnCoulter

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216547160730157057


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Alt_Illegal

    @EricLiford @AnnCoulter @curtdoolittle You’re calling South of the border low IQ societies so I gotta say something. 🤦‍♂️

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216547160730157057

  • I need to find a week to write a paper challenging the scientific community to f

    I need to find a week to write a paper challenging the scientific community to falsify the IQ/Personality argument because as far as I know it’s solved.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-12 20:52:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216462949486866433

  • RE: THE NEUROSCIENCE OF INTELLIGENCE @charlesmurray 0. Correct but the opposite,

    RE: THE NEUROSCIENCE OF INTELLIGENCE
    @charlesmurray

    0. Correct but the opposite, via-negativa: The neuroscience is trivial. The causes of defect in intelligence are almost limitless. It’s… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=553167525280142&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-12 20:47:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216461789178802176

  • Work does not lead to fulfillment. Family, friends, fitness and harmony lead to

    Work does not lead to fulfillment. Family, friends, fitness and harmony lead to fulfillment. Income and wealth only reduces stressors.And only reduce stressors if you’re a successful competitor and gain fulfilment from it.

    Propertarians can fix fin-econ and increase fulfillment. https://twitter.com/BradWilcoxIFS/status/1216047717966893058